Budgetary Magic: Funding of Obamacare

From reading and listening to all the learned pundits it seems remarkable that no one has really ever tried to show in some concrete way how the 111 Congress and the Obama Administration were able to say with a straight face that they passed ObamaCare and balanced the budget all at the same time.  Remember they wanted to give 43 million people health insurance and not increase the federal deficit...  the problem was how to pay for it.

Here is how they were able to do it:

• Make the drug companies reduce the prices of their drugs by $80 billion (coercision?)
• Take $500 million from Medicare and Indian health service (deception?)
• Force 300 million buy health insurance for $900 million (constitutional?) (tax)
• Increase payroll taxes
• Force 50 states to use Medicaid to subsidize the future regional health pools (constitutional?)
• Regulate the insurance industry to force them to reduce costs 
• Force the insurance industry to accept more people

The CBO was able to certify that the budget would not be busted because ObamaCare was going to push all the costs to the states and citizens of this country which meant the cost to the federal government would not result in a deficit..  The only thing that the federal government will now pay is the cost of regulating the insurance industry and the enforcement efforts by the IRS.

The consequences of this White House and Congressional shell game was to shift the cost burden onto the shoulders of the citizens and the states.  They did not reduce costs -  they just rearranged the cost pools until the burden was off Uncle Sam.  We will either pay for this legislation through payroll taxes, income taxes, or being forcibly required to pay for federally mandated health insurance's coverage which the consumer will have no choice except to write the check.  The federal government will dictate everything - the cost of insurance, what will be covered by insurance policies, etc.

Eventually the insurance industry will no longer exist; we will be left with only the federal government selling us our insurance policies.  I am not looking forward to the day that we have to stand in line to buy insurance policies like we have to purchase car tags.

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

OBAMA before and after

Compare Obama the candidate versus Obama the President - we deserve better!


  As Candidate (promised)                      As President (delivered)

1. Pacifist                                   Libya 
2. against raising debit ceiling       raise debt ceiling 
3. against Bush foreign policy      endorsed Bush foreign policy
4. immigration reform                  sue Arizona 
5. inclusion of all citizens              polarization by race, by religion
6. pro-business                           anti-business
7. equal opportunity for all           increase in food stamps & redistribution of wealth
8. cool under fire                         arrogance and condescension
9. full employment                       inflation and more unemployment
10. balanced budgets                    $&$%@^%*$**&^*
11. transparency in government      $&$%@^%*$**&^*
12. economic growth                    bureaucratic regulations
13. hope and change                     fear and worry 
14. defeat of Patriot Act                extended without comment
15. leadership                               follower
16. Constitutionalism                     Regulations
17. national energy policy               *&(**&%%^&###@%$#^%^$#
18. global respect of USA              Apologizing for USA
19. Christain                                  pro-Muslim
20. economic prosperity                 economic misery 
21. accountability                           $&$%@^%*$**&^*            

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

Our Constitution: The future effectiveness of this document

No member of Congress apparently takes the time to ask the question: Is it constitutional?  I would imagine that only a handful members of Congress have read The Federalist Papers and  I also am adamant that they do not have a copy of the constitution handy to refresh their memories.

I am concerned, like all Americans, about the future of the United State of America.  We spend too much; make too many promises that we cannot afford and assume that we should just raise taxes whenever we have a deficit.

America has fought wars in Europe, North America, South America, Africa, China, Philippines, Southeast Asia, Central America, and Puerto Rico.  We have fought a Revolutionary War, a Civil War, two World Wars, and 27 (circa) non-declared wars  from Mexico, Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Grenada, to Panama. We have spent billions $ (trillions) and lost hundreds (thousands) of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. Why have we fought in these wars? What does it all mean to us today? Did we spend all this money and waste all these lives to defend our culture, our political system, to give citizens and non-citizens $ entitlements, or was it to defend liberty AND/or the constitution?  Are we grateful to the sacrifices of our veterans?  How many of these wars were fought with Congressional approval as proscribed by the Constitution?

We have enacted laws that provide $ entitlements for generations to come (e.g. Social Security, Medicaid, Obama-care, and Medicare) which are destined to cost us as much or more than we have spent on all the wars. Are we rasining taxes just so we can fight another war or are we seeing the end of the United States of America as we know it.  Why do we keep enacting new legislation that promises $ millions to current and future generations without taking the time to figure out how much it will $ cost and make sure it is sound $ financially?

We are so proud of our constitution but we abuse and discredit this document almost daily by Congress, by the Supreme Court, or by the Executive Branch (President). The President can issue "Executive Order" that has the standing as LAW without the consent of Congress. The President can attach a "signature statement" to legislation passed by Congress to deletes parts that he does not like.  Why am I frightened of Obama, a constitutional scholar, that he will abuse our Constitution even worse than did FDR, Woodrow Wilson, George Bush, or Lyndon Johnson, etc?

All the while, Congress uses filthy lucre $ to bribe States to do their bidding on entitlements, immigration, education, etc.  They dangle the opportunity to obtain free money ( with strings attached) to the States that shrink the amount of influence States have with their own citizens.  The Federal Government seems to be in a battle to win the hearts and minds of the citizens of every State of the Union with juicy entitlements like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that enhances the ability of the federal government to wean away the loyalty of citizens from their respective State.  Citizens are now more dependent upon the Federal Government than they are on State Government.  This in and of itself is an abuse of power.

Congress uses bribery to win converts

Congress has granted the Executive Branch the authority to control private property through the Environmental Protection Agency.  Congress created the private Federal Reserve System (FED) to handle all monetary policy of the United States without any oversight by Congress, the Executive Branch, or the Supreme Court.  Congress created the US Department of Education to allows the Executive branch to use filthy lucre $ to persuade States to hand-over their responsibility.  Since the creation of the Department of Edcuation our international ranking of scholarship has fallen each and every year while spending $ billions.

The Supreme Court has found new loop-holes in rights.  Abortion being the most notable and long-lasting of these new rights.  When was the last time you heard the Supreme Court declare a provision passed by Congress is unconstitutional?  Until ObamaCare came along, I do not remember such a ground swell about the constitutionality of any legistialtion.  Why wasn't Socail Secuirty added as a constitutional amendment rather than as a piece of legislation?

Fw: IBDeditorials Newsletter: March 06, 2012 issue

Today's cartoon from IBD Editorial Cartoonist Michael Ramirez

The Declaration of Independce

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connecte3d them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the cause's which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among,\ men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, then to right themselves by abloslig\shing the forms to which they are accustomed.  But when a long train of abuses and usurpation, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is  their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.  Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.

The history of the present king of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states.  To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary of the public good.
He has forbidden his governnors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large district's of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has endeavored to present the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has made judges depedent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

The Bill of Rights - Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Ayn Rand

Muslim Cleric Plans White House Protest in Attempt to Spread Sharia Law in America - FoxNews.com

Muslim Cleric Plans White House Protest in Attempt to Spread Sharia Law in America - FoxNews.com: "A Muslim cleric who called Americans “the biggest criminals” during a recent interview has announced he will hold a protest outside the White House, according to the Daily Mail.

Anjem Choudary, who once said “the flag of Islam will fly over the White House,” says he will lead a demonstration rallying Muslims to establish Sharia law across the United States.

Choudary, 43, called Americans “the biggest criminals in the world today” during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity this month.

Choudary, who is the former leader of the outlawed British-based group Islam4UK, says the March rally at the White House is being organized by the extremist group Islamic Thinkers Society, which is based in New York.

“The event is a rally, a call for the Sharia, a call for the Muslims to rise up and establish the Islamic state in America,” Choudary told London’s Daily Mail in an interview.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

Opinion: In the name of James Madison - Roger Hodge - POLITICO.com

Opinion: In the name of James Madison - Roger Hodge - POLITICO.com

It is high time that American liberals rediscovered the Founding Fathers. This suggestion may come as a surprise, because for many on the left, Madison and the other Founders are an embarrassment. Appeals to their authority are often dismissed as reactionary or inherently conservative. The republican principles of Madison and his great ally Thomas Jefferson usually receive little more than condescension or caricature — as an obsolete agrarianism at best, pro-slavery apologetics at worst.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Man charged with 3 counts of murder in Va. attacks - Yahoo! News

Man charged with 3 counts of murder in Va. attacks - Yahoo! News

MANASSAS, Va. – A Salvadoran man who was ordered deported nearly a decade ago but never left has been charged with three counts of first-degree murder in a series of shootings and a knife attack in a Virginia suburb of Washington, authorities said Friday. Jose Oswaldo Reyes Alfaro, an illegal immigrant, was charged in the pair of attacks blocks apart Thursday night that left three people dead and three others injured, Manassas Police Chief Doug Keen said.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

My Way News - Ariz. governor countersues federal government

My Way News - Ariz. governor countersues federal government

PHOENIX (AP) - Gov. Jan Brewer sued the federal government Thursday for failing to control Arizona's border with Mexico and enforce immigration laws, and for sticking the state with huge costs associated with jailing illegal immigrants who commit crimes. The lawsuit claims the federal government has failed to protect Arizona from an "invasion" of illegal immigrants. It seeks increased reimbursements and extra safeguards, such as additional border fences. Brewer's court filing serves as a countersuit in the federal government's legal challenge to Arizona's new enforcement immigration law. The U.S. Justice Department is seeking to invalidate the law.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Republicans Seek Spending Cuts In Debt Ceiling Fight - Investors.com

Republicans Seek Spending Cuts In Debt Ceiling Fight - Investors.com

News the federal deficit will hit a record in 2011 pushed Congress one step closer Wednesday to its first major battle of the year: raising the debt ceiling. The national debt stands at just over $14 trillion and will soon hit the statutory limit of $14.3 trillion. If Congress doesn't raise it soon, the Treasury won't be able to issue debt above that ceiling, which would lead to substantial spending cuts and the eventual possibility of default. Many Republicans are insisting on major spending cuts in return for raising the ceiling. Democrats scoff at the idea. Meanwhile, Tea Party activists are gearing up to fight over the issue. Red Ink Is Expensive

The budget deficit will hit a record $1.48 trillion in fiscal 2011, the Congressional Budget Office predicted Wednesday. Over the next decade, an additional $6.7 trillion in red ink is expected. Meanwhile, the unfunded liability for Social Security and Medicare is $19.1 trillion in present-value terms. With the long-term fiscal picture looking dire and anti-deficit fervor among voters stronger than ever, many GOP lawmakers are demanding major cuts in exchange for voting to raise the debt limit. "We can't afford to kick this can down the road any longer," said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. "We need both spending cuts and spending caps in any deal to raise the debt ceiling." The GOP-led House will likely do just that. But Democrats still control the Senate and White House. It's unclear how a standoff would play out politically.

Meanwhile, Tea Party activists oppose any debt-limit increases. "We think voting for the debt ceiling is a dangerous thing to do," said Mark Meckler, co-coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots. "It's time to cut up the credit card." A few Tea-infused members, such as Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., are steadfastly refusing to vote for a debt-limit hike. But more Republicans, like Flake, see a chance for driving a hard bargain. Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., recently said in a speech on the House floor: "When Congress is asked to increase the statutory debt limit, which will likely happen in the next few months, I will vote no, unless — and let me be completely clear here — there is a firm commitment to deal with the larger issue or the vote itself is tied to a plan to put America on a path to financial responsibility."

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Shariah Takes Precedence over U.S. Constitution

Hizb Ut-Tahrir: Shariah Takes Precedence over U.S. Constitution: Imam Promises to Fight "Until Islam Becomes Victorious or We Die in the Attempt" :: The Investigative Project on Terrorism

According to Hizb ut-Tahrir, the world's social and economic problems will not be fixed until the world is governed by Shariah and the government controls all major industries. Lenders would no longer be able to charge interest, which one speaker decried as a "poisonous concept." Charity, or zakat, was advertised as the way to alleviate "economic inequality." "Secular capitalism has made me devalue my skin" and "has kept my family in ghettos," said one speaker, an African-American who went on to blame it for the fact that he smoked marijuana and his grandmother played the lottery. Capitalism, he added, is a form of economic "terrorism" and "causes us to be sent to mental hospitals."

Barack Obama's presidency, he said, "is only a scheme or con" to trick people into thinking that things will get better under capitalism. But time and again on Sunday, Hizb ut-Tahrir officials seemed to be playing slippery rhetorical games of their own - particularly when it came to the behavior of despotic Muslim regimes and terrorists. When a few skeptical audience members pressed speakers over the fact that Islamic governments in Iran and Saudi Arabia are despotic, conference speakers claimed those weren't "authentic" Muslim governments and that the CIA (and by implication, the capitalist U.S. government) was to blame for the problems in those countries.

In an interview with WBBM-TV in Chicago, HT deputy spokesman Mohammad Malkawi refused to specifically condemn Al Qaida and the Taliban. Hizb ut-Tahrir has not been designated a terrorist group by the U.S. government and it insists it is only interested in instituting radical change by nonviolent means. But HT's alumni include 9/ll mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the late Iraqi terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi and would-be Hamas suicide bombers, and the group's pro-jihadist rhetoric has led critics to label it a "conveyor belt for terrorists."

One Muslim American group issued a statement in advance of the conference condemning Hizb ut-Tahrir's radical ideology and challenging others to follow suit. "Hizb ut-Tahrir preaches an ideology that calls for the destruction of the principles that America is founded on," said Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy. "While their words are protected by our First Amendment, their actions and movement must not be allowed to take hold.

The silence of American Islamist organizations like [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] CAIR and [the Islamic Society of North America] ISNA in condemning the ideologies of Hizb ut-Tahrir and their agenda of insurgency in America speaks volumes to their own, albeit, more camouflaged Islamist agenda." HT's efforts to rehabilitate its image won't be helped by the menacing tone on display Sunday.

One late-afternoon panelist suggested that modern industrial powers could fall to Muslims the way Mecca fell to Mohammed nearly 1,400 years ago. A speaker identified by conference organizers as Imam Jaleel Abdul Adil said that "if they offer us the sun, or the moon, or a nice raise, or a passport, or a house in the suburbs or even a place to pray at the job, on the condition that we stop calling for Islam as a complete way of life - we should never do that, ever do that - unless and until Islam becomes victorious or we die in the attempt." 

Later, the following dialogue ensued between the imam and a member of the audience over whether Shariah or the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land in the United States (click here to see the clip): Audience member: "Would you get rid of the Constitution for Shariah, yes or no?" Imam: "Over the Muslim world? Yes, it would be gone." Audience Member: And so if the United States was a Muslim world, the Constitution would be gone?" Imam: "If the United States was in the Muslim world, the Muslims who are here would be calling and happy to see the Shariah applied, yes we would." Audience Member: "And the Constitution gone. That's all." Imam: "Yes, as Muslims they would be long gone."

While Hizb ut-Tahrir's controversial message attracted demonstrators and some media attention, the group at least is open about its ambitions. It not only is determined to destroy capitalism -- it would shred the United States Constitution as well in favor of Shariah law.

Thanks to our immigration laws we have gone from 150,000 muslims in america in 1970 to 2.5 million of them now. So get ready to continue hearing more spewing and belching of islamic rhetoric in this regards. If nothing is done to stop current patterns of immigration - islamic influence culturally, politically, and socially will continue to increase here in America. That is what various cultures do - as they grow, they exert more dominance, power, and influence over the land in which the live - this also will include acts of terrorism. the problem with this website.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Advocate of Violence - WSJ.com

Advocate of Violence - WSJ.com: "In a unanimous unsigned opinion, the justices overturned Brandenburg's conviction: 'The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.'

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

The Bill of Rights - Amendment II

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

New, big challenges confront Obama the candidate

New, big challenges confront Obama the candidate: "Obama owns the slow-to-recover economy and is the face of a Washington he once campaigned against. Polls show his diverse voting coalition from 2008 cracked and his support among independents weakened. His path to Electoral College victory in 2012 is tougher. And he doesn't have George W. Bush's unpopularity paving the way for a Democratic victory.

But the upsides are huge, too.

His personal popularity is still high and he has the White House bully pulpit. He's a proven record fundraiser and he has no primary challenger. The brain trust of Obama's first campaign will run the second. Also, there's no obvious Republican rival in a crowded GOP field.

This president has accomplished more in two years than many of his predecessors did in two terms.

After preaching bipartisanship as a candidate, Obama the president leveraged huge Democratic majorities in Congress to produce a series of legislative achievements: the health care overhaul, new financial rules and an economic stimulus measure. He declared an end to the combat mission in Iraq and, while bolstering U.S. forces in Afghanistan, he has pledged to start pulling troops home.

It's a record that could help or hurt his prospects depending on the whims of an electorate that has shown itself impatient with spotty progress amid economic turmoil.

The issue is certain to dominate the campaign.

'This will be about the economy,' said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. 'It was when we were last playing presidential politics, and it will be when we start again.'

Economists predict the unemployment rate won't fall considerably before the election. White House officials privately acknowledge that they don't expect a complete economic turnaround. They're banking on good economic news—like the Friday report that unemployment slipped to 9.4 percent in December—will continue over the next year, allowing Obama to argue that he's overseeing a rebirth and, thus, shouldn't be fired.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

House Republicans Push Bill to Shut Down White House 'Czars' - FoxNews.com

House Republicans Push Bill to Shut Down White House 'Czars' - FoxNews.com: "House Republicans have President Obama's 'czars' in their crosshairs once again, introducing a bill this week that would effectively shut down their offices
.

The bill, authored by Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., is a revamped version of a proposal that went nowhere in the last Congress. But with Republicans in charge of the House this year and a particularly combative Republican in charge of the committee that will be considering the measure, the proposal might have a fighting chance this time around.

'We're hopeful for this one,' Scalise spokesman Stephen Bell told FoxNews.com.

Though the definition of a 'czar' is muddy at best, it generally refers to top-level administration officials who don't have to go through the Senate confirmation process. The Scalise bill aims to be a bit more specific than that, defining a 'czar' as the 'head of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President' or similar office, appointed 'without the advice and consent of the Senate.'

Scalise's office estimates that 39 officials in the Obama administration fall under this description. The bill would order Congress to cut off all funding for them and the offices they control. Presumably, the president could afterward try to reinstate them by seeking Senate confirmation.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

Constitutional Activity?

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

In House, new Republican majority plans to act fast to undo Obama's agenda

In House, new Republican majority plans to act fast to undo Obama's agenda: "Almost as soon as they take control of the House at noon Wednesday, Republicans will embark on a 20-day plan aimed at undoing major aspects of President Obama's agenda as they seek to take advantage of the weeks before the Senate's return and the president's State of the Union address.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness

Could Your Pension be seized?

European nations begin seizing private pensions - CSMonitor.com:


Could this ever happen in the USA?


"People’s retirement savings are a convenient source of revenue for governments that don’t want to reduce spending or make privatizations. As most pension schemes in Europe are organised by the state, European ministers of finance have a facilitated access to the savings accumulated there, and it is only logical that they try to get a hold of this money for their own ends. In recent weeks I have noted five such attempts: Three situations concern private personal savings; two others refer to national funds.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness